Warning: mktime() [function.mktime]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'America/New_York' for 'EDT/-4.0/DST' instead in /home/owatch/www/www.olbermannwatch.com/docs/countdown.php on line 5KO's new contract with MSNBC ends in...0 days 0 hours 0 minutes

THE SEARCH FOR MISSING AMERICANS IN THE TSUNAMI DISASTER: Dean Radford, vice president of global security and intelligence for International SOS

OLBYWATCH GUIDE:

First of all, let me thank Bob Cox for the welcome, after watching Countdown with full attention for the first time, I can understand his warning. Danger Olby One Kenobi, rank delusions ahead.

Although KO claims to be non partisan, as in this email interview with Mark Glaser who asks him why he is the first (and only) one reporting on the Ohio "fraud", KO makes the incredble statement ">>>Relative to my being first, I think it's largely because I'm not a full-time political guy and not a partisan.<<<

His partisanship reeks through even his supposedly humorous stories. He had some excellent footage of the Tsunami and the disaster at the beginning of his show, but had to get in a dig at the Bush administration by asking his correspondent on the scene, Dean Yates, about those (namely, but unsaid, the Bush administration) who say that this is an opportunity to show the world they are humanitarian.

The question is phrased to give maximum humiliation to Powell and others when the expected come back, none of these poor villagers have ever even heard of the United States and couldn't care less, is instead answered that yes, all the people receiving help in Indonesia know that *all* the help is coming from the United States, and that the U.S. is the only ones who can get in there and give them help. "Unnh" KO grunts, clearly disappointed by that answer.

These kinds of ridiculing questions and extremely biased 'tells' in his approach to every story is what made me stop watching him so long ago, after enjoying him as a sports guy for years. But I forgot, he is totally non partisan. Right.

He started the Gonzales piece by saying that Gonzales poo poo'd the Geneva conventon against torture--actually what Gonzales did was say it didn't apply because terrorists don't meet the definition of soldiers--and while he will trash Gonzales with little ridiculing comments like this, there is never anything from the other side. The national terror alert system---stolen from the rainbow. Dumb, but anything to bash the Republican Administration.

But let me get to the story he has spent so much time on recently, the so called Ohio Electoral fraud. KO and Craig Crawford spent most of their time defending themselves and slapping each other on the back for wanting this electoral protest to take place in the Congress. They assured themselves that if the shoe were on the other foot that the GOP would also be doing the same. Don't sooner or later you actually have to have some evidence that there was some kind of fraud? Interspersed between one black Congressman screaming that some people had to wait in line four hours to vote in Ohio...In the Rain!!!...followed by John Lewis of Georgia screaming black people died to win the vote...ah when was that? 1885?

KO, Moveon.org and the Democrats would be funny if it weren't so offensive. They are clearly delusional, no one takes this seriously, and the sad thing is that the people who do believe this get their delusions fed more and more by KO's false legitimizing of nonsense like this. Why is Moveon.org not living up to its name? More like staystuck.org.

If they really cared and were genuinely non partisan they would be doing other things than trying to undermine Bush's clear electoral victory. This is neither the appropriate time or place to be calling for voting reform, and therefore one can only conclude that that is not what this is about. This is about undermining Bush, about adding depth to the phrase, Sore Loserman, not fixing anything.

thanks Chuck, and Johnny, good idea. He is after all one of the few left in the mainstream media supporting this vote fraud in Ohio story, actually he may be the only one. I noticed that Chris Jansing and her assigned guest last night both were a bit incredulous over this story, Chris asking a question in the exact opposite manner as Keith would. She asked, won't the Democrats be concerned about appearing bad over this (Boxer's rebellion). Her guest was smiling in acknowledgement.

Unfortunately it was much more recently than that, MHaley. A former Klansman was arrested today for the 1964 murder of three civil rights workers who were encouraging blacks to attempt to registered to vote despite literacy tests designed to thwart them.

But thanks for the dead-on clarity you have about the stunt yesterday and the mindset of those behind it.

Cecelia, thanks for your comments. I was engaging in a bit of hyperbole on the 1885 date, I don't know when the last time blacks died for the vote. But it sure as heck wasn't from standing out in the rain for four hours in Ohio last month.

Actually, those slain civil rights workers were all white, I believe. And most of soldiers in the civil war were white. Come to think of it, most of the people who died for blacks to vote were white.

I am sure if Jesse Jackson were at Congress yesterday he would be saying "it's Selma all over again", like he does about everything. Inflating any perceived slight into the highest sort of injustice diminishes racism to a joke.

I don't see ANY evidence of fraud or racism in the Ohio vote, nor in Florida 2000. I lived in Florida then and was mad when the state settled with the NAACP over "disenfranchisement" of black voters then. They had zero evidence, but the state did not want to appear insensitive.

That is the problem with these constant over exaggerations and made up charges, it creates a delusional reality for people, increases their paranoia and sense of seperation, and prevents real problems from being solved.

They were Michael Schwerner, age 24, Andrew Goodman, 20, both from New York and James Chaney, 22, from Meridian, Mississippi. Chaney was African American. All were Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) members working to sign up new voters.

I'm sure you mean well, but upon rereading your last post, I have further reactions.

First, please accept my deep thanks for your insightful prognostication: "I am sure if Jesse Jackson were at Congress yesterday he would be saying "it's Selma all over again", like he does about everything." It provides a helpful glimpse into the workings of Rev. Jackson's mind and motivations. Cool!

But you don't stop there. "I don't see ANY evidence of fraud or racism in the Ohio vote, nor in Florida 2000."

Since you "don't see it," it doesn't exist. I admire your resolute absolutism.

You continue: "I lived in Florida then and was mad when the state settled with the NAACP over "disenfranchisement" of black voters then."

(You appear to still harbor resentment over this.)

"They had zero evidence, but the state did not want to appear insensitive."

May I ask how it is you know this? Were you "on the inside" of the legal action of which you speak?

Your big finish: "That is the problem with these constant over exaggerations and made up charges, it creates a delusional reality for people, increases their paranoia and sense of seperation, and prevents real problems from being solved."

The old " Must be another one of those EXXXAGGGERRATIONS..." argument. We exaggerate and people get delusional and paranoid. Or perhaps we who are delusional and paranoid exaggerate, diverting attention from problems of real import. You know, denial also can prevent problem-solving. Which are you guilty of? If you choose none of the above, I submit that you're at least guilty of making sweeping, unfounded "gennneralllizzations."

To say I don't see it, is a way of expressing my opinion. And I can tell, I have looked. Friends of mine were ballot examiners in Florida, I studied all the evidence that was put out including the Human Rights Commission Report, one book on the Florida election from each side. I read numerous newspaper articles during the whole thing and it was basically my whole life for months I was so caught up in it at the time.

I have argued Florida so much already I am tired of it and am not going to get back into it again in any big way, but I can tell you the strongest evidence they had of racial "disenfranchisement" fraud was a woman who went through a police traffic stop set up in a neighborhood at their request, where they did the same thing every month, two miles from the polling place. She got through fine, and went on to vote, but later told Mary Francis Berry's investigators that she just felt "intimidated" by the traffic stop. The rest of the evidence is downhill from there.

Generalizations can be dangerous, but sometimes they are just true. All water is wet is a generalization, but it is a true one. No genuine evidence of racial fraud was found in Florida or Ohio is a generalization but it happens to be a true one.

Here's another one for you. Democrats are so busy making up bogus claims like this that they are not doing their real job as the minority party which is to come up with substantive opposing ideas with which to counter Republican policies. It makes people like me think they are not credible.

Republicans gained the majority when Newt Gingrich came up with his 1994 Contract with America, marking when the GOP stopped whining and started offering something. If the Democrats want to start winning again they need to actually stand for something that is real, not all this manufactured conspiracy stuff.

Apparently I wasn't as immersed in Ohio as you were in the Florida recount. I've not claimed outright fraud, only that I saw numerous irregularities and heard considerable anecdotal reports; enough that I hesitate to discredit those who lodged such claims. I can't speak for Florida 2000, except for what I've seen in the public record, but regarding evidence in Ohio, first-hand experiences raised my suspicion. Nothing I witnessed was any more exrtaordinary than the reported anomalies. These may be explainable--the next step was to thoroughly do that. Since that won't occur, I feel you and others who share your point of view are a tad presumptive to assume none was credible.

Regarding your disbelief in the credibility of the Democratic Party, all I can say is that if this election proved the Republican party credible to you, I'll not convince you that the Democrats will ever have something to offer you. Enjoy your party and prosper!

You seem to be a nice fellow--a bit ill-informed but polite and I appreciate that. Thanks for your courtesy. And I mean it--enjoy the next 4, 8 or whatever years! Y'all won!

I hardly think this election proved the Republican party credibility.:) I have never witnessed a descent into lying in American politics as bad as this year, way worse than 2000 in my view. By both sides.

Not to beat a dead horse, but the thing about vote fraud is that what happened in Ohio that Democrats are trying to gin up into fraud is the same thing that happened in every state in every election, I think actually the voting was better in Ohio than a lot of places. The only reason the Dems went after it is because the vote was fairly close and they thought they should have won.

I am sure that voting was worse in California, as far as mistakes. I know it was in Napa, there were all kinds of errors but the thing of it is, elections are run by humans and humans make mistakes. Nobody cares about California's votes because CA is squarely in the pocket of the Dems. In Napa they mailed absentee ballots, wrong names on some ballots, wrong precincts, wrong everything. The local paper made much of it but nobody cared because for one thing most of us including me know the local Election Sup, John Tetuer, and we know he isn't pulling anything. Its a small place and it is easier to tell things. Even though he is a Democrat and they run this town, as a Republican I trust they are not going that far.

No, I really think the Democrats with all these phony trumped up accusations have really hurt the Democratic process in this country by being so small minded and extremely partisan. Part of the problem is that they blindly feel superior and that they should be running things, they are outraged that Republicans who they see as neanderthals destroying everything are winning elections, and that that justifies just about anything. It is a blindness that as long as it persists the GOP will just keep doing better and better.

Thank you very much for your observations and opinions. Politics can be a dirty business. I agree with much of what you say, but suggest only that you frame your opinions with "I feel," "I suspect," "I think," rather than "I am sure," "I know," etc., unless you're ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN, because it can blunt the impact of your argument on anyone who rightly or wrongly holds a dissenting view. They may miss the "trunk" of your argument because they latch onto a weak "branch." This isn't easy, because we believe stongly in our opinions and want others to value them. But when one states opinion as fact to an opponent, I think it can reduce one's ability to persuade. I'm guilty of it, too, but am working to change it. We need to argue points of fact against points of fact and opinion against opinion; the lines between which, these days, are becoming blurry indeed.

For instance, to your point "Part of the problem is that they (dems) blindly feel superior and that they should be running things, they are outraged that Republicans who they see as neanderthals destroying everything are winning elections...". I'm a registered Democrat and I don't feel this way. My bothers don't feel this way, my sisters don't feel this way...you get the idea. How `bout trying "I think part of the problem is that they blindly feel superior and that they should be running things...".

I, for one, will respond much better to arguments framed in this manner, as, I believe, would most "responsible" Democrats. I suggest this only because you seem reasonable--I don't mean to lecture or insult you and I certainly don't intend to appear superior. It's just that people have pointed this out to me and I feel my arguments are better as a result. Some who post here may disagree.

BTW, I still don't see why everyone made such a fuss over Howard Dean's yell. We've all gone a little nuts (I think!).